The Rashtrakutas and their Times c17.s1.1

c17.s1.1

Every village in our period was usually under the charge of a village headman, whose office was a very ancient institution both in the south and in the north.(1) Like the headman of the Taluka and the district, the village headman was also a hereditary officer. He was more a representative of the people than a servant of the central government. The truth of this observation will be realised from the case of a headman in Shikarpur Taluka who died of broken heart, or perhaps committed suicide, in 999 A.D., on seeing the ruin of his own town.² During our period this officer was known as a Grāmakūṭa in Maharashtra and Gāvuṇḍa in Karnatak. Sometimes our records mention a Grāmapati in addition to a Grāmakūṭa;³ it would seem that Grāmapati in such cases denotes the holder of a village inām. Grāmabhoktṛs figuring in some of the Śilāhāra records⁴ seems to belong to the same category. In 974 A.D. the village of Kadkeri in Karnatak had a village governor in addition to a village headman; the former is described as a hero in battlefield and a touchstone of heroes.⁵ Some of the villages were, therefore, clearly assigned to military captains. There are examples of some others being assigned to scholars,⁶ and the number of those alienated in favour of learned Brahmanas was considerable. The holders of these villages seem to be referred to by the expressions ‘Grāmapatis’ or ‘Grāmabhoktris.’ The unalienated village, however, had usually no officer appointed by the central government. It used to get its business done through the agency of the village headman.